"If we really want to fund those things, then we have an opportunity to go back to the appropriators before they finalize the bill, at least I think we will…." That was the Pentagon's comptroller, Jules Hurst, speaking on the sidelines of the NDIA Emerging Technologies Conference about how the Department of Defense would respond if Congress fails to pass the $350 billion reconciliation package the department requested for FY27.
What the Pentagon asked for, and what it put in reconciliation
The department made a strategic bid for $1.5 trillion next year split across two measures: $1.15 trillion in the base budget and $350 billion in a reconciliation bill. Senior Pentagon officials placed high‑priority programs—among them Golden Dome, munitions buys, and the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group (DAWG)—inside the $350 billion reconciliation request, according to Hurst.
Timing pressure: a continuing resolution and "three weeks" to FY27
With three weeks left until FY27 kicks off, Congress had advanced only incremental work on the base request and had not moved the reconciliation package. Lawmakers, citing midterm elections looming in November, opted to pass a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the department funded through Dec. 11. Hurst said the department is preparing for the possibility that the first CR could be followed by a second, and that final budget actions may fall into the new calendar year: "I think it’ll probably happen in the new calendar" year.
Audit-ready is a season. It shouldn't be.
Evidence in spreadsheets, controls drifting between audits, frameworks multiplying on flat headcount. Nubivance runs continuous compliance on Rapid7 Cyber GRC - SOC 2, HIPAA, ISO 27001, PCI, CMMC.
End the scrambleHow the Pentagon proposes to retool priorities with appropriators
Hurst described a contingency plan: if reconciliation fails, the department would work with appropriators to reallocate key investments into the base budget. That approach, he warned, would require cuts or deferrals elsewhere. "If we really want to fund those things, then we have an opportunity to go back to the appropriators before they finalize the bill," he said, but added it was "too premature" to know exactly what decisions or trade‑offs would be required. "The question would be, what's more important to have money for in FY27 [or] can it wait for FY28," Hurst said, noting that some technological areas are evolving so fast they need money now, while others can wait for more research and development.
Golden Dome and DAWG: service leaders raising alarms
Service leaders have begun sounding warnings about programs placed in the reconciliation pot. Space Force Gen. Michael Guetlein, charged with making Golden Dome a reality, warned that work on the national air defense shield "could come to a grinding halt in October" if lawmakers do not figure out continued funding for the presidential initiative. Lt. Gen. Steven Marks, involved with the department's drone development task force, cautioned that the DAWG could "stumble" without at least some FY27 funding. He said, "We’re at a point where there is a potential for us to get, uh, some money out of the FY27 budget, the president’s budget, that will go directly to DAWG," and acknowledged uncertainty over the full request: "[I] don’t know if we’re going to get the full ask of $53.6 billion, but my greatest concern is, if we don’t get something, then the momentum that we have created since DAWG has been stood up, over a year ago, will be waning."
Munitions deals: industrial incentives and allied demand
Hurst emphasized that the department is seeking multiyear munition deals both to refill U.S. stockpiles and to deliver weapons to allies and partners who have ordered them. He described how the structure of those deals changes contractor behavior: "Those [munition deals] really fundamentally change when we buy things from contractors, because for the first time we’re making them put in CapEx…. If they don’t meet these targets, these production targets, it’s going to hurt their profitability, and they have a real incentive to meet them." Hurst added a geopolitical and moral dimension: "A lot of these munitions that we want to buy, we’re not the only ones…There’s countries across the globe who are US allies and partners who are also involved. So we have a fundamental responsibility as America to make sure we can produce enough arms and armors for all of our partners and ourselves."
How service leaders, appropriators, and allies and partners are responding
- Service leaders: Already flagging program risks, they will be called on to prioritize which efforts can be deferred to FY28 and which need funding now—Golden Dome and DAWG were explicitly identified as vulnerable to funding interruptions.
- Appropriators in Congress: Will be the engine of any retooling; Hurst signaled the Pentagon plans to "go back to the appropriators" to trade budget lines if reconciliation does not pass, a conversation that hinges on timing as the CR runs to Dec. 11 and potentially beyond.
- Allies and partners: Relying on planned multiyear munitions production, they are stakeholders in whether the Pentagon secures funds to underwrite CapEx commitments and meet production targets tied to allied orders.
The department's posture is pragmatic and public: it will lobby appropriators to preserve the investments it placed in reconciliation, but it acknowledges hard choices ahead. As Hurst put it, "The department’s going to make its priorities known because we think all these investments are important." With three weeks before FY27 and a CR stretching into December, the central question left on the table is whether Congress will find room in the base process or subsequent appropriations to cover those priorities—or whether some programs will be cut or delayed into FY28.
